UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Date: 10-Dec-2009 I, Signe Barfoed , hereby submit this original work as part of the requirements for the degree of: Master of Arts in Classics It is entitled: An Archaic Votive Deposit from Nemea - Ritual Behavior in a Sacred Landscape Student Signature: Signe Barfoed This work and its defense approved by: Committee Chair: Kathleen Lynch, PhD Kathleen Lynch, PhD Jack Davis, PhD Jack Davis, PhD 2/2/2010 378 An Archaic Votive Deposit from Nemea Ritual Behavior in a Sacred Landscape A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Classics of the College of Arts and Sciences 2009 by Signe Barfoed B.A., University of Copenhagen, 2007 Committee: Kathleen M. Lynch, Chair Jack L. Davis i ABSTRACT This thesis presents material from an unpublished votive deposit discovered in a field on a low hill ca. 700 m. east of the Sanctuary of Zeus at Nemea. The deposit consists of about 1000 pieces of Archaic pottery mostly of Corinthian production. Different shapes of miniature vessels predominate, but the deposit also contains lamps and terracotta figurines. Even though no architectural remains were found, the miniature votive pottery and figurines indicate a shrine or small sanctuary in the area. Its location with a panoramic view of the Sanctuary of Zeus as well as close to a spring that provided water to the Sanctuary of Zeus, emphasizes the shrine’s connection to the sanctuary. The deity to whom this rural shrine might belong is difficult to identify. The generic assemblage of votive pottery and figurines does not contribute to identification. However, the location at a ravine next to a spring finds parallels in Etruria and South Italy, and the deposit may reflect the discontinuation of a shrine possibly dedicated to the water nymph Nemea, who in myth and history is tightly connected to the area. ii An Archaic Votive Deposit from Nemea Ritual Behavior in a Sacred Landscape Signe Barfoed, M.A. University of Cincinnati, 2009 Copyright © 2009 by Barfoed, Signe. All rights reserved. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost my deep-felt thanks go to Kathleen Lynch, who has been a wonderful supervisor. Steadily, friendly, and firmly has she guided me through unfamiliar waters. I would not be here if it was not for her, and words cannot express my gratitude. I am also grateful to Dr. Jack L. Davis for providing me with the material to begin with as well as his help in trying to find the missing part of the deposit. I also want to thank Dr. Kim S. Shelton, the Director of the Nemea Center of Classical Archaeology at Berkeley, for all her extraordinary help in Nemea; logistically this thesis could not have been done without her. My gratitude also goes to John Wallrodt, who cheerfully answered all my various technical questions, Carol Hershenson for understanding, and to Laura Deller who was always most helpful. I want to thank my family for their support despite the far distance, for sending Danish sweets, and letting me do what I needed to do. Thank you to my friends for being there, you know who you are. Lastly, without Søren, who helped in all the ways he possible could and his continuous belief in me, us and what we do, I would never have come this far – thank you. TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract______________________________________________________________________ i Acknowledgements____________________________________________________________ iii Table of Contents ______________________________________________________________1 List of Tables _________________________________________________________________4 List of Figures ________________________________________________________________5 Chapter 1. Introduction _______________________________________________________12 Research History _____________________________________________________________12 History of the Deposit__________________________________________________________15 Chapter 2. Deposit Summary and Chronology ____________________________________20 Missing and Available Material __________________________________________________20 Regular-Sized Vessels _________________________________________________________21 Miniatures ___________________________________________________________________24 Miniature Hydriai and Kalathiskoi________________________________________________26 Other Miniatures and Missing Material____________________________________________28 Terracotta Figurines ___________________________________________________________29 Chapter 3. Topography _______________________________________________________40 The Immediate Context of the Deposit ____________________________________________40 The Sanctuary of Zeus _________________________________________________________43 Contemporary Features in the Sanctuary of Zeus ____________________________________44 The Shrine/Heroön of Opheltes __________________________________________________49 Other Votive Deposits in the Sanctuary of Zeus ______________________________________50 1 Chapter 4. Interpretations _____________________________________________________54 Production: Workshops, Techniques, and Fabrics ____________________________________54 Workshops___________________________________________________________________54 Techniques __________________________________________________________________56 Fabrics _____________________________________________________________________59 Corinthian Fabric _____________________________________________________________59 Attic, Argive, and Local Fabrics__________________________________________________60 Ritual Behavior _______________________________________________________________63 Gods, Goddesses, and their Places________________________________________________65 The Depositional Event_________________________________________________________67 Shapes and Functions __________________________________________________________70 Distribution of Shapes _________________________________________________________74 The Relation of the Shrine to Other Sanctuary Sites and the Question of the Deity __________80 Topographical Features and Assemblages__________________________________________80 The Deity____________________________________________________________________87 Chapter 5. Conclusions________________________________________________________95 Catalogue __________________________________________________________________100 Appendix __________________________________________________________________188 Works Cited________________________________________________________________195 2 Tables ____________________________________________________________________205 Figures ____________________________________________________________________208 3 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. The Rawson deposit, shapes, fabric, available, and missing material. Table 2. Conventionalizing decoration on kotylai/skyphoi, available portion of Rawson deposit. Table 3. Fabrics, after Jones 1986, p. 175. Table 4. Corinthian Conventionalizing decoration, Corinth VII.5, table 1. 4 LIST OF FIGURES Fig. 1. Map of the NE Peloponnese, Nemea Vallley highlighted. http://www.brynmawr.edu/archaeology/NVAP/Index.htm#CONTENTS (December 7, 2009) Fig. 2. The Nemea Valley, Sanctuary of Zeus marked with star. http://www.brynmawr.edu/archaeology/NVAP/Geog.htm (December 7, 2009) Fig. 3. Grid plan of the Sanctuary of Zeus and its surroundings, Miller 1976, p. 175, fig. 1 (Site of Rawson deposit marked with a star, PP 10). Fig. 4. Grid plan of the Sanctuary of Zeus, Bravo 2006, fig. 1 (Deposit in PP 10, 700 m east). Fig. 5. Map of PP 10, Google Earth, and gridplan, after Miller 1976, fig. 1. GPS Coordinates: 37°48'36.47"N - 22°43'3.08"E (PP 10 marked with star). Fig. 6. Area PP 10, June 2009, view toward south. Author. Fig. 7. Road between Corinth and Argos, no. 23 is the Sanctuary of Zeus, Marchand 2009, p. 139, fig. 11. Fig. 8. Plan of the Sanctuary of Zeus, loci of votive deposits marked in green, after Bravo 2006. Fig. 9. Map of sites 510 and 512 with kilns, Wright et al. 1990, p. 598, fig. 4. Fig. 10. Piet de Jong watercolor 26 (P951). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. No. UCPdJ514). Fig. 11. Piet de Jong watercolor 27 (P956). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. No. UCPdJ515). Fig. 12. Piet de Jong watercolor 74 (P1110). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. Nos. UCPdJ525). Fig. 13a-c. Piet de Jong watercolors 277, 231, and 42 (P1050, P1068, P970). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. No. UCPdJ522-23, UCPdJ517). Fig. 14. Piet de Jong watercolor 112 (P938). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. Nos. UCPdJ509). Fig. 15. Piet de Jong watercolor 77 (P940). Archives, Department of Classics, University of Cincinnati (Inv. Nos. UCPdJ510). Fig. 16. Vermicular Painter kotyle, Amyx and Lawrence 1996, no. 158, pl. 37. Fig. 17. Kotylai from Locri. http://www.archeocalabria.beniculturali.it/archeovirtualtour/calabriaweb/locriparapezza1. htm (December 7, 2009) 5 Fig. 18. Schalenturm, Walter 1957, p. 48, fig. 2, pl. 70. Fig. 19. Plan of Marzabotto, Bentz and Reusser 2007, p. 40, fig. 12 (Tinia Temple and spring sanctuary marked with stars). Fig. 20. Plan of Asine, Wells 2002, p. 96, fig. 1. Deposits marked. Fig. 21. Asine figurine of figure holding a bow, Wells 2002, p. 115, fig. 20. Fig. 22. Prosymna figurines, Blegen 1939, p. 422, fig. 10. Fig. 23.